Em Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 01:49:04PM +0200, Ingo Molnar escreveu:> > * Brian Gitonga Marete <marete@toshnix.com> wrote:> > > > OK. Now that I actually look closely at that fragment I can see its useless to > > > create the automatic arrays. Local string literals would also work (i.e. just > > > pass `"Yes"' and `"No"' to newtWinChoice). But can also do what you suggested if > > > it is anticipated that they will be used somewhere else within the file at some > > > other time -- Currently they are not.> > > > Oops. Sorry. What I suggested won't work because of the -Wwrite-strings default > > option. Which actually makes me understand why the original author of the code > > made it the way it is. Your suggestion of file-scope, static does solve the > > problem.> > Btw., -Wwrite-strings has proven to be a really useful warning in practice, in that > it ensured that we propagate string immutability/const-ness as widely as possible. > This resulted is cleaner perf code in the long run.> > Here we cannot fix the Newt prototype (it's an existing library outside of our > control) to take a const so we have to do the (mild) workaround of moving it to file > scope. (if this becomes common then we'd have to re-evaluate the use of this > warning)> > I think Arnaldo has plans to get rid of the libnewt dependency altogether - that > might be a fix too.

Yeah, but for now I'll just reap the results of this long discussionabout this issue. :)